Kuldip Singh, Judge.This revision has been directed against the order, dated 30.3.2011 passed by learned Rent Controller (4), Shimla in case No. 57-2 of 02/98. The revision has been filed by tenant, who has been impleaded as respondent No. 3 in the rent petition before the Rent Controller.

2.The facts in brief are that respondents No. 1 to 4 have filed petition against respondents No. 5 to 7 and petitioner under Section 14 of H.P. Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 (for short, the Act) for their ejectment from building No. 139-140, one floor in 4th floor, Lower Bazar, Shimla on the ground that building is quite old, condition of the building further deteriorated when the building was gutted in fire on 25.11.1996. The landlords want to carry out building and rebuilding work of the building which cannot be carried out without the premises being vacated by the tenants. The building is required bonafide by the landlords for carrying out building, rebuilding and reconstruction work. The plan of the building has already been sanctioned by municipal corporation, Shimla on 2.12.1996.

3.The petition has been contested by the tenants. It is notnecessary to give details of the defence in vie